User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive10

Privet tovarish[edit]

What is the point of Rouge Admin, how can someone become a rouge admin and it isn't explained well enough what this word means.

Holodomor[edit]

By what right do you delete Category:Genocide from Holodomor article. Even if you are an admin of Wiki, you have no power and right to neglect the law. Any discussions are profitable before the law was accepted. But now law says: "Holomor is a genocide", so be so kind not edit the Holodomor article.--133.41.4.46 10:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note.

Massacres in Ruanda and Holocost are recognized as a genocide in UN
Armenian genocide, Holodomor, ethnic cleaning in former Yugoslavia are recognizes as genocides by law of several countries
Massacres of Mongols in the 13 century are called democide and aren't recognized as genocide--133.41.4.46 10:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are great debates whether the Holodomor was genocide. It is discussed in the article. We include in the Category the facts that all the scholars agree about. This is not the case. See the discussions on the talk page of the article and archives. Genocide is a subcat of Democide, it includes such disastrous events as Khmer Rouge. Nobody of the sane people deny that millions died there, that is argued if a specific national group was targeted. Thus Democide is a good compromise abakharev 11:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anon, the law only defines Genocide. To be exact it is defined by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Convention provides only a definition and does not list any specific cases. As such, it is up to scholars, anot not the governments to agree or disagree on whether the definition fits a specific case. The scholarly debate is still unresolved as presented in the article. Your opinion, while valuable, belongs only to a talk. --Irpen 11:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doz[edit]

Hello I have been working on the two Lossky articles. I would like to make and entry on sobornost as well as sophiology. I was hoping for some help with an English version of this sophilogyarticle. Can you help? Please? LoveMonkey 15:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well spanky! Hip hip lets get to it.. Can you properly translate the sophia page..Yes I am lazie.... :) LoveMonkey 16:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey created the sobornost page. Could you look at it and tie in the Russian wiki articles for me, to it? Thanks LoveMonkey 13:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So you are angry with me. Well please forgive me I meant no ill will. LoveMonkey 20:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Love, I am not angry with you. I admire your work, just I am very busy at the moment. I will help with Lossky when I could abakharev 22:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AN[edit]

Please see here. It wasn't good. Tyrenius 21:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have answered on WP:AN. Feel free to block me, if you feel it is justified abakharev 22:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not saying no group can do more than 3RR, though I think as a basic principle only 1RR should be done anyway. Simply alternating reverts till someone gets to 4RR and a block doesn't seem a good policy. Irpen could have been blocked for his actions. I've made my points and that's as far as I wish to take things. Tyrenius 00:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Cossacks[edit]

Semiprotect the article against persistant vandalism.
What did I miss in the last three weeks?--Kuban Cossack 00:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Если у этих пид...в все-таки получиться убрать 1973-й год, то надо всячески отстоять 1954-й. Ко мне в наследство сейчас перешла вся Большая Советская Энциклопедия из 50 с лишним томов которая изданна как раз в этот период. Там очень богатый фотообзор и карт и всего... В конце-концов ну бред это из за Грузинских законов мы не можем фотки ВОВ выкладывать. --Kuban Cossack 00:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

need your admin duties done[edit]

Balcer has removed my edits on the talk:Erika Steinbach please warn/punish his for this. also, please start warning people for WP:NPA, as it has extremely gotten out of hand, PP accusing others of sockpuppetry to defame them, Balcer and Stettiner both attacking other users. This is of course overly simplified as you can see the talk page for yourself

--Jadger 05:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, forgot to add the link [[1]]

--Jadger 05:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jadger does not like the way the poll is going, so he decided to restart a new one on his own whimsy. I removed his new, completely unjustified vote proposal twice (it is only a rehash of the vote already occuring), while I attempted to persuade him on his talk page that going ahead will only introduce further chaos into the discussion. In the meantime, I also tried to explain to him on his talk page that his course of action is unreasonable, not least because it disrespects the votes of 12 other people who have already voted. That is all I can do. If he persists in introducing his proposal, I will not stop him. Balcer 05:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I have restored your proposal to a subpage. There is already a poll going on on the talk page and two polls on the same page may confuse things. I think we should first see if the first poll yields meaningfull results, then start the second poll in needed abakharev 05:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA[edit]

With all respect to your opinion, I would like to point this out from WP:ITIS:

Editcountitis is used humorously to suggest a belief that a Wikipedian's overall contribution level can be measured solely by their edit count. This is a phenomenon which some think may be harmful to processes such as requests for adminship, as well as to the Wikipedia community in itself. The problems with using edit counts to measure relative level of experience are that it does not take into account that users could have an extensive edit history prior to registering an account (posting anonymously), and that major and minor edits are counted equally, regardless of whether the edit is a typo fix, or the creation of a full article.

Furthermore, edit counts do not judge the quality of the edits, as insightful comments on talk pages and acts of vandalism are counted equally. Hence, it is not always a reliable way of telling how experienced or worthy a user truly is. Nevertheless, using the edit count tool is often useful for obtaining a very rough idea of how the editor interacts with the Wikipedia and how much experience he or she has.

All edits are perfectly welcome, including trivial edits like fixing typos. Each edit consumes disk space and other resources, so please don't edit in a manner intended to artificially increase your edit count, such as never using preview. Using Kate's tool to see where you are relative to some personal milestone (like 1,000 or 5,000 edits) is perfectly fine. Remember what we're all doing here is building an encyclopedia, not competing to see who makes the most edits.

I would hope that you wouldn't think that a lack of counted edits would detract from my ability to do sysop duties. Cheers, ~ Porphyric Hemophiliac § 22:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Hi Alex, long time no see...can you pleaes block KreshnikD as a sockpuppet of Kachik (aka -Inanna-). It's pretty clear from the contributions—thanks. —Khoikhoi 01:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

InShanee already has beaten me on this abakharev 02:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm, here's another one: User:KanuniSS. It's pretty obvious based on this, but what gives it away is that they talk almost exactly the same ("double standards", etc.). Inanna just sent me an email recently, and all of a sudden the Kanuni account becomes active again.
- Also Mizrak (talk · contribs) appears to be her as well (compare to the contributions of Kachik). —Khoikhoi 02:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - InShanee has beaten me up with KanuniSS, I have beaten him with Mizrak abakharev 02:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's great, thanks. There is one more user, but I am not positive about this one, so blocking would be a bad idea right now. —Khoikhoi 02:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3rd opinion needed[edit]

Perhaps I am not neutral enough. Can you take a look at [2] and [3]? I think this is a violation of NPA, but maybe I am overeacting?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 02:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I meant that he calls him a monster at his userpage, and it's not a 'cookie monster', its a 'deletion monster'.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 03:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nixer[edit]

Just thought you should take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dwarf_planet/Naming&diff=76403488&oldid=76403194 Ryūlóng 04:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend[edit]

I thank you for your kind and encouraging message to me: [4]. It was comforting to learn that you, like me and several others, are concerned about the Project. I do believe that the Project shall continue to thrive despite several negative factors as wikipedians have repeatedly demonstrated their agility as the most vibrant virtual community. Ultimately, nothing is going to deter wikipedians from accomplishing the mission for which we all have gathered together. You could have noticed that immediately at the suggestion of Zora, I had "forgotten" the matter. But, certainly, none would like to be called a "troll". Such incidents waste a lot of valuable resources of the Project and negatively affect value addition to wikipedia, and make working here a traumatic experience instead of being part of a fun filled experience. Regards. --Bhadani 13:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

On 19 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nikolay Karazin, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Taktakishvili[edit]

virtually the whole article is copied from the printed Associated Music Publishers, Inc. edition of Taktakishvili's Sonata for Flute and Piano, (as admittedand stated in the article itself). Best regardsSmerus 18:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Znamya (newspaper)[edit]

Dear Alex Bakharev,

It seems we have some common interests.

I've noticed your work on the 1902 Russian paper, Znamya--but it was lost because it was not DISAMBIGUATED from the current one which has the same name.

Can you help me get a copy of the 1903 articles?

Or can you tell me what library--anywhere in the world--even Russia--has it?

Is it on MICROFILM?

If you help me on this, I will do my best to use it for the benefit of WIKIPEDIA--I promise.

--- Yours truly, Ludvikus: 01:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)Ludvikus

The Halo's RfA[edit]

Alex Bakharev...
Thank you very much for the constructive criticism in your oppose comment in my request for adminship. Ultimately, no consensus was reached, and I failed to be promoted, but I am very grateful for your coments. I will strive to better myself in all areas, especially Mainspace.

Th ε Halo ^Θ 23:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian transliteration[edit]

Hello, I see you are listed as a native speaker of russian. Could you please tell me if there is any standard set of rules for russian to english transliteration of words concerning letters not represented perfectly? Thanks in advance. --NEMT 06:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaparte again, again, and again[edit]

Please see Blaga (talk · contribs), thanks. —Khoi khoi 19:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually not Bonaparte but Blaga. --Blaga 19:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done abakharev 19:55, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet. —Khoi khoi 19:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You[edit]

Thank you very much. i will let you know if it happens again.Ganfon 03:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

civility[edit]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. abakharev 03:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have the story wrong. First of all, User talk:Kintetsubuffalo has been trying to force an edit war. Second of all, he has violated WP:Civil. Third, I had to warn User talk:Kintetsubuffalo about a possible WP:3RR. Finally, my last edit of his page ended up in an edit conflict which i corrected. I don't know what prompted you to comment on my page, but you should get all the facts first. --evrik 03:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was mistakenly reported as having vandalized a page. I did not vandalize any pages. I mistakenly blanked a page because of an edit conflict. While I have commented on the actions of User talk:Kintetsubuffalo, I have not attacked him personally. I am going to remove your warning, again, because it is not justified. If you want to see personal attacks, look here. --evrik 03:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please tell me where in this policy Wikipedia:Blocking policy does it say that removing a warning is cause for block? Also, would you mind telling me where I was incivil? --evrik 15:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

subst?[edit]

Hi. Thanks for the longer block on User:141.151.86.197. I just realised that I subst'ed the repeatvandal template and that it says at WP:SUBST not to. Does it matter? Do I need to go back and replace it with an unsubst version? Thanks. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 03:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Evrik[edit]

Hi Alex, was asked by Evrik to look into his block. I was reviewing WP:AIV at the same time you were earlier and saw Ryulong's post, which was in error. I'm assuming this is what prompted your warning message. I see things escalated after Evrik removed the template messages from his talk page. I've advised Evrik not to remove administrative warnings even if he thinks they were placed in error. Would you consider unblocking him? Many thanks -- Samir धर्म 04:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, I also support the request for unblock. I was in the same situation as Samir — I was reviewing the AIV report at the same time. Ryulong's post to AIV was in error. — ERcheck (talk) 04:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not block him based on the Ryulong message, I just twice ask him to be civil and once not to remove messages from his talk page. I have to investigate the matter further abakharev 04:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, take your time and thanks for looking into it. Not sure if you knew, but the matter is on WP:AN also. Thanks again -- Samir धर्म 05:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my AIV listing was a screw up. Kintetsubuffalo should be blocked for WP:TE, it seems, though. Ryūlóng 05:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex, I have unblocked Evirk after checking with Samir and Ercheck on WP:AN. This is the first time I have undone another admin's action. I think it is okay to let him go with a warning. If you think I did not act correctly, please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - Ganeshk (talk) 06:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal Trouble[edit]

24.104.82.145, I believe is the same person attacking the MTPA page. The person constantly removes MTPA's notation from the Manheim Township High School page.

Another request[edit]

~~Hey, can you please move "Cretan Muslems" [sic] back to it's original title, Cretan Turks? Miskin moved the page without any consensus, and we've decided to go to WP:RM for this one. Thanks.~~ —Khoi khoi 22:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. —Khoi khoi 00:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the Islam in Bulgaria needs semi (or full) protection. This anon keeps adding stuff about the Turks' "dog belief". Although racism towards Muslims in Bulgaria did exist, the anon continues to revert without replying to my comment on the talk page, and it's starting to become disruptive. —Khoi khoi 23:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —Khoi khoi 23:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid64's RfA thanks[edit]

Thank you very much for participating in my RfA, which closed successfully earlier today with a result of (60/9/4). Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to me. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --Nishkid64 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble from Node Ue[edit]

Greetings Alex Bakharev!

I just want to inform you that Node Ue has recently been making Personal Attacks on my talk page: (for example, Here)

I consider his statements to be rude, bullying and threatening.

Can you please help me block that user? I think that is the only way to make him "grow up". Thanks.

Regards --Jose77 03:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response[edit]

Hi Alex,

Clearly you're not familiar with the conflict. It spans several Wikis. First of all, my initial message to him was polite. His response was very rude. My second message was also polite. Rather than respond, he simply deleted it from his talkpage.

This is a continuation of a pattern he has enforced at the Wikis where he is an admin - whether or not a user is a native speaker, if they criticise him in any way, he has banned them, including a native speaker of Uighur, even though they didn't vandalise at all. He then deletes all of their messages on talkpages.

As you can see, above he requested that I be banned from en.wiki. And look at the message he left on my talk page just before you. Can you honestly expect me to continue assuming good faith after he has pretty much proven he hates my guts? --Node 05:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, this is a problem that concerns several Wikis (not just the Uyghur Wikipedia, but the Hawai'ian Wikipedia, as well as several other Wikipedias Jose is "helping" at). I'm not sure Jose has an account on Meta, anyhow, this conflict is confined to user talk pages. Saying that his writing was "hissing" is not a violation of WP:CIVIL. On the contrary, it is a subjective description of the rude and uncivil tone Jose77 used in his initial response to me as well as in all subsequent responses. Again, while you may be attempting to be fair, I will remind you that I was only concerned with solving a problem peacefully in my first two messages (which have since been deleted by Jose77) and that I was very polite. In my 3rd message, I was extremely terse, but again I did not say anything which was a personal attack. Indeed, he did ban a user on the Uyghur Wikipedia for expressing their opinion. This is verifiable, even the reason he gave for the ban confirms it. I have not so far acted outside of policy. You seem to be prejudiced against me based on previous experiences with me. May I remind you that those were in topics that are completely unrelated to this, took place several months ago, and that you weren't even directly involved with those (I don't recall you commenting on any of the talkpages or banning any users or locking any pages, just a warning or two to me for "bad behaviour" which you seem to have judged entirely outside the scope of aforementioned conflict). Other users involved in that conflict, including Oleg Alexandrov, Mikkalai, and Irpen, should be able to confirm that I am not, as you have told Jose, "known to be excessively confrontational and stubborn". If anyone here has made a personal attack, it's you or Jose -- I'm surprised at you, having said what you did. --Node 09:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Node, I want to say sorry if you consider that I say to Jose as a personal attack against you. It was not my intention. Still no amount of consensus here would change anything on the Uighur or Hawaiian wiki, so I would suggest to move your argument there it matters - either to these wikis or to the Meta. I have no authorities over these places, so you have to go there by yourself. On English Wiki this argument is empty that does not help to build English-language encyclopedic content, you welcome to keep civil discussion here but I would not tolerate any incivility here, not from you nor from Jose. abakharev 09:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russophobia?[edit]

Do you really believe Image:Merridien Web.png is a good example of Russophobia? Somehow I doubt it. You may not like to hear this, but Russians on holiday do not have a very good name. And this is quite understandable, because certainly in the first years after the fall of communism, the new wealthy Russians were able to go abroad. And typically, these people did not acquire their fortune by being nice; this reflects on their personality, and they typically think they own the world and order other people about. Also typically, they create an awful mess in their hotel rooms, which could explain the additional charge. Of course, this situation is awkward for an ordinary Russian, and on my travels in Russia, I have befriended many people who would make an excellent impression abroad, but are unable to go there financially. Errabee 23:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, statistically, black people of the United States are much more often involved into violent crimes (both as perpetuates and victims). Still an announcement in a hotel "Blacks - 20% extra" would be rightfully considered racist. I do not see much more difference here. In fact the announcement came to my attention after my coworker (with whom I share my office) was booking his holidays. He has been living in Australia for the last 15 years, AFAIK not particular violent nor excessively rich. Speaking of the article it is indeed biased. IMHO there are two main POVs on the matter: 1) The Russophobia is a very important phenomenon, 2) It happens now and then but not a big deal. The article seems to be strongly biased towards the first POV, while the second seems to be the mainstream. I simply do not know how to fix the problem. It is difficult to prove that something is not a big deal (maybe some sort of statistics would help here). The problem is shared by all the X-phobia type of articles. abakharev 23:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions[edit]

Hi, I added the two portals to my watchlist. --McTrixie 19:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schilder or Shilder?[edit]

Just wondering. Since the Russian is Шильдер, I thought the correct transliteration would be Shilder. Errabee 02:32, 1 October 2006 (UTC)==[reply]

Scythians[edit]

Hi, looks like barefact opened up a new article about Scythians. Of course the article lacks sources (none of the ancient authors are correctly references) and the Grammer and English is very poor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian_European_Kingdoms

Also much of it overlaps the Scythian article and if there is any factual content in the article, it should be included in the Scythians article. --alidoostzadeh 20:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scythian European Kingdoms? It appears you are familiar to some level of a user dispute between User:Khosrow II and User:Barefact that has spilled onto the AfD page. As it reads now, this AfD reads as a personal attack, not a genuine argument for deletion. -Markeer 22:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because WikiCookies need to be washed down with something...[edit]

... and because I appreciate your help with new article annoucements on various portals, and your other good deeds.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 16:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: TV6 Russia[edit]

Privet Alex Bakharev

You wrote: I share the authors's sentiments but the article should be written in a neutral tone

Every word of the article is from western newspapers. They are very anti-Russian, I know. I don't know what your setiments are, but I think, based on the English articles I have read, despite the American propoganda, I think TV6 Russia should have been closed.

I don't read Russian very well. Please take the time to add verifiable sources to this artile, preferably russian sources, to "even out" the bias.

I am guessing about what portions you think are not neutral, becuase you really didn't explain.

Also, in the future, please comment on the talk page why you want the NPOV tag to be added, many people remove this tag if you don't comment on the talk page.

I will keep the tag for a week, and if no one has come forward to explain why it is not neutral, after a week I will remove it. Udachi Travb (talk) 07:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How did you do that?[edit]

Re: [5] I have never added ==categories== but I was desperate. The old article was all scruntched up, so you couldn't read the last two sentences. Look at the current version, which you can change back here how did you do that? Travb (talk) 09:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not smoking crack, I guess it is a bug in wikipedia that makes the categories go up: look at this http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/travbailey/buginwikipedia.jpg Whenever someone hits edit, the categories bar is all messed up. once I hit the article button, the article is fine. Weird. Travb (talk) 09:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I did nothing with the article, just removed the ==Categories== heading. I have not noticed anything extraordinary with the formatting of the article, but the thing you described looks like a glitch with the WMF software.

BTW the article Vladimir Gusinsky is a shame. He is quite a colorful personality and deserves an interesting article. abakharev 09:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed you just now, check your in box.

I remember the old Russian joke, that one of my dear friends told me, tell me if you heard it (keep in mind I am paraphrasing):

Russians are swimming in shit up to their necks, they are just about to drown. Suddenly a knight on a white horse comes in and says, "Fear not, I am here to save you". And all the Russians with shit up to their necks say: "No, no, you will create waves."

I am surprised that their have been so many revolutions in the FSU. I never thought it could happen in my dear Ukraine. I really despise so much about Americans, but their ideologies and their beliefs really work. What I saw in Ukraine, I don't have very much hope for those in the FSU. There is not the Protestant work ethic or value system like Americans. The corruption and the alcholism is so complete in Ukraine. Ukrainians are too timid, to patient, to willing to follow others. I feel so bad for my dear Ukrainian friends and their bleak futures. I predict there will be many, many more Vladimir Gusinskys. The Orange revolution gave me hope, but it quickly faded, as I predicted all of Ukrainaian's hope would fade.

Actually no one should be surprised, historically, disillusionment always happens after almost every revolution. Even in America, we had our bloody Shay's Rebellion, the poor realized that the revolution would not bring all the promises they had hoped and died for. I remember reading about the disillusion on communist Emma Goldman after the Russian revolution, who heard (or did she see first hand?) Lenin ruthlessly have their own Shay's Rebellion...Travb (talk) 09:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your block of User:Jlambert[edit]

You may have missed this, but approximately 3 minutes prior to your blocking of User:Jlambert, I had left him a warning on his talk page and updated the notification on WP:AN3. Obviously, you were writing your warning while I was writing mine, so the mistake is perfectly understandable. Nonetheless, I feel obligated to give Mr. Lambert the benefit of the doubt since my warning landed in his talk page before yours.

I would therefore like to unblock Mr. Lambert. But I felt it only appropriate to provide you with due notice and ample time to present a counter-argument, if you wish.

All the best,
Ξxtreme Unction|_{yakkity yak}
05:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prompt notification. I have unblocked Mr. Lambert. If he reverts further, however, feel free to re-block him.

ΞU

Russia[edit]

Alex, some obnoxious anon keep adding {{verylong}} template to this article. I'm sure we have better candidates for the template. Could you recommend some guidelines as to when the template should be used? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, Russia was 49K this morning before РКП started trimming it. I'd say the split was justified.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What can I say? Russia is not Bhutan. The largest country is the world should have the largest article in Wikipedia. Actually, it doesn't. Just a random check: Signapore is 58K, Ireland is 57K, Romania is 56K, etc. Now anonymous people will consider the article too short and start adding all kind of nonsense there. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fisss[edit]

And what I see? You've granted an award to a definite vandal.

Now he uploades copyvio and falsifies licenses. For example here:[6] he inserted in his image a license which was copied from another image (the author explicitely gave me permission for a number of images, it was very long ago).

He also now vandalizes the Moscow article, deleting the proper relevant images and inserting his copivio and comletely irrelevant. He also moves images so they appear inproperly. He does not discuss any changes any way.--Nixer 21:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:NorbertArthur[edit]

Hi, Alex. This person has been subjecting people to repeated personal attacks of the lowest kind (you may see previous blocks on his page), and he has just launched in a disgusting diatriabe against me on my talk page (because I have told him repeatedly to list entries for persons by family name, and he has not understood what I meant on any of those occassions). The messages are in Romanian, and are both threatening and obscene from one end to the other. I have told him, following his first reply, that I will appeal for a ban, and he has replied that he has tens of accounts opened, and threatened to ruin my reputation (?). I can indicate one of the accounts he uses, but I have to check my archived talk pages. I think his large contribution of spam and inaccuracies will help pinpoint all accounts he has opened or intends to open.Thank you for your attention. Dahn 02:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done abakharev 08:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Of all his sockpuppets, I know of User:Mortzy (he has confessed on an archived talk page of mine, and it is quite obvious from looking at the page and the contributions). Dahn 16:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fisss again[edit]

Hi! Can you please help with this user again? Now he uploades copyvio and irrelevant images into Moscow (see discussion here:[7]). He also removes a map of administrative divisions of Moscow Image:Msk all districts abc eng.svg, city plan and other useful, relevant and copyright-free images and schemes, inserting intead irrelevant ones. He avoids any discussion. Can you please make him to stop warring and discuss his changes at the talk page?--Nixer 18:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has become an establish practice that the users who refuse to talk and persist with contentious edits get blocked as an attempt to get a message that in WP cooperation is required. --Irpen 18:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppeting[edit]

Dear Alex, I guess the User:Hectorian is the sockpuppet or meatpuppet of the User:Tekleni. Could you follow their future contributions or keep this information in mind. Cheers. E104421 19:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alex. Thank you very much. I just wanted to inform you. Cheers. E104421 17:27, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA[edit]

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your support in my RfA. :-) I really appreciate it! Best, Irongargoyle 20:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Bad image list[edit]

Alex, regarding this addition to the list, as there is no article use, are we bothering with a bad list entry, instead of a simpler solution like WP:IFD? — xaosflux ^Talk 19:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC) (Please reply either on my talk or on the mediawiki talk)[reply]

I have asked the author if he plans to use the image abakharev 21:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image was added to mousetrap after uploading. It was removed by an anon with no comment and has now been restored. It is a perfectly encyclopaedic image. Adding it to the "bad image" list alongside autofellio et al. without discussion is bad form, and I have accordingly removed it. If you have a problem with people using it for vandalism then deal with the vandals. It sounds like a pretty specific case. ed g2s • talk 22:24, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arab scientists[edit]

In fact you will see that I justify all of my changes - others do not. They are determined to push a pan-arabists defintion of arab (not even the most widely recognised one in English) onto a list which (read first paragraph of article) is not about race but about cultural contributions.RuthieK 10:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

St. Isaac's Square[edit]

Hi, Alex. Please compare this and this. I believe User:Supershow deserves a stern warning. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least he was trying to avoid copyvio abakharev 21:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pivotal eRelationship[edit]

Hello Alex, It looks like you deleted my contribution:

11:21, 8 October 2006 Alex Bakharev (Talk | contribs) deleted "Pivotal eRelationship" (g11)

Can you tell me what is going on?

-Mage

It looked like an advertisement of a not-notable software product to me (see WP:CSD#General_criteria, criterium 11). Since you contest my desicion, I have restored the article and put it on AfD instead. Please argue your case there. abakharev 23:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks from StuffOfInterest[edit]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 52/6/1 (~90%). It was an interesting process which gave me a chance to learn a bit about myself and about the community. My intention now is to slowly ease into using those additional buttons on my page. No use being over eager and mucking up the works. The support of all those who went over my record and/or rallied to my defense after the big oppose vote was instumental to the success of this review. Again, thank you! --StuffOfInterest 11:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

e-mail[edit]

Dear, Alex, i would like to know how to send an e-mail in wikipedia? I could not find the direct link. I enabled from my preferences the e-mail option, but i do not know how to activate it or give a link to it in my signature. E104421 07:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alex, thank you very much. I previously had used the toolbox in your page to send to an e-mail, but i had't recognized the link. Apologizing for your pains, E104421 00:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RV wars, dispute[edit]

Dear Alex, please consider locking this article [2006 Georgian-Russian espionage controversy] based on RV wars, POV deletions and huge dispute over the article. Until somebody can resolve this issue, the article should be locked from being edited and contents being deleted. I think Girla has gone too far in his attacks on Kober. Many times i offered him co-operation[8] but unfortunately it did not work. Im sorry to bother you, I know you are Russian and may find some problems with my edits but being a fair administrator i trust your judgment. Thanks for you attention and help. All the best. Ldingley 14:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hostility[edit]

Dear Alex, I need your advice, cause i do not want to involve in any edit war but there is on going war against every turks/turkey related articles by users tekleni and hectorian. Actually, i'm trying not to take them into account but i'm confronting with these users almost all the turks/turkey related articles. I'll give you a recent example. The article Turkish Republic of Western Thrace is merged with the article Republic of Gumuljina by user tekleni (who is supported by user hectorian) without building any consensus on the talk/discussion page. These greek nationalists (can be realized from their contributions history) are now trying to delete the article. If you investigate their contributions history, you'll immediately discover that these users are trying to dispute everything related with turks/turkey related subjects. Wikipedia should not be a propaganda or advertisement service for turkish hostility. What should we do? E104421 06:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Alex, please check my contributions, my edit summaries and the messanges i have posted, and u will see if i am a nationalist or not... User:E104421 had been adding a tag in Antalya asking for a citation about... (?), i guess etymology and history of the greek name. i removed the request for citation cause i could not believe someone could dispute something so obvious! he insisted, so i added a source [9] (note that's not a greek one). About the 'Turkish Republic of Western Thrace' and the 'Republic of Gumuljina' thing... Lets try a simple Google UK (for obvious reasons i do not use Google Hellas) search: 'Turkish Republic of Western Thrace' gives just 3 results: the Wikipedia article, the talk page of a Wikipedian and a forum. 'Republic of Gumuljina' gives 208 results! I think that those who want to name it 'Turkish' are crossing the line of nationalism... Sorry for bothering u. Regards Hectorian 06:44, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why you (Hectorian and Tekleni) are so fast about merging and deleting? You never mentioned anything in the talk/discussion page but decided together to delete the article. Your contributions history simply reveals what you are doing in wikipedia againts turks/turkey related articles. E104421 07:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For Antalya article, i just wondered whether the information is correct or not? In academical writing, references should be given for these kind of information. However, you (hectorian and tekleni) merged the article, and now trying to delete it by voting. Furthermore, i never edited anything about the article Turkish Republic of Western Thrace, but just wondered why you are trying to remove/delete it, and ask Alex what to do. E104421 07:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have merged the history of the articles as it was requested by Khoikhoi. Now in the history of the article we can see contributions of the authors of the both original articles, the authorship rights of everybody according to GFDL and everybody is happy. Despite the scary template, merging of histories only means that an article is in the deleted state for a few seconds, no reasons to worry. Everybody on the Wiki is now and then accused of been a nationalist, I was accused in been Russian Nationalist, Zionist and Ukrainian Nazi as well as Russophobe, Anti-Semite, Polonophobe, Anti-Ukrainian, Anti-Romanian, Anti-German etc. User:E104421 was accused as beed Anti-Turkish (probably as been a Greek nationalist) straight for the very first of his edits. Just take it easy, guys abakharev 07:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong in asking for sources if you have real reasons to doubt and fact in Wiki article abakharev 07:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

__________________________________________________________________________________

Samos Island[edit]

Hallo Alex. I noticed that the page on Samos Island has been locked. Earleir today I noticed that the page had a few mistakes which I attempted to change. For example: The Samos "muscat grape" was refered as "Vathy grape" which is obviously wrong; "Vathy" does not exist as a name of any grape apellation, it is just the name of the old town of Samos!

Another piece of information that I found quite irrelevant was located at the top of the Samos Island page therefore of promient importance and refered to the actual name of Samos Island in the Turkish language as being "Sisam". As an inhabitant of Samos Island I find this piece of information to be irrelevenat, misrepresenting and offensive. Samos is a Greek island with Greek inhabitants since antiquity. At one point in time over a century ago it was under Ottoman power but only as a semi-independent state with special privileges. There was never a Muslim/ Ottoman/Turkish minority on the island just a small guard and typically a Christian governor of Greek nationality appointed by the sultan. Secular modern state of Turkey was created after the fall of the Ottoman empire and long after the war of independence of Greece and particulalrly Samos which became once again a part of the state of Greece in 1913. Therefore according to historical facts there is no reason to state any other names for Samos apart from that which is Greek and recognised all around the world since antiquity. The malovalent claims of some Turkish politicians and military chiefs in recent years over the Aegean and Greek islands make this sort of misleading piece of information even more dangerous. I kindly request that under these circumstances and within the context of the encyclopedic information presented by Wikipedia that the Turkish name of Samos be excluded from the Samos Island page. What would happen if anyone would just visit any other city/location description and add different ethnic names? I hope this request is found logical and just and this matter is corrected appropriately! Thank you for your time. efpalinos

RfB With A Smile :)[edit]

thanx[edit]

Hi, Alex. Thank you for all your help. I'm very sorry, cause i'm consulting to you all the time, but i do not know anybody as experienced as you in wikipedia. Apologizing, E104421 12:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Alex. Everything related with the dispute i mentioned above is progressing in a wonderfull way. The user Fut.Perf. is involved in the issue to compromise. We started to discuss the issue on the talk/discussion page of Fut.Perf.. I hope we'll solve the dispute and put an end to unfortunate edit wars. Kind regards, E104421 18:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fisss and unsourced images[edit]

Privet, Alex!

This is regarding the issue about User:Fisss uploading unsourced images and falsifying licenses that I brought up on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. You were the only admin who commented there, and you asked that somebody goes through the images Fisss uploaded and looks for possible copyvios. Well, I did. Then the issue got archived and no action has been taken. Fisss continues uploading tons of images with no source info and removing the tags that I added (e.g. here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Moskwa4.jpg&action=history or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Bolshoytheatre.jpg&action=history ).

So, I'm a little confused. What's the story with that issue? Should I continue tagging the images? Should I just let it be?.. Azov 21:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring again[edit]

Hi Alex. Please have a look at 2006 Georgian-Russian espionage controversy. User:Elk Salmon repeatedly attacks the article, removing the school image and accusing me of vandalism. He refuses to accept dozens of sources posted on the talk page. Could you please protect the page again? Thanks, Kober 13:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holodomor semi-protection[edit]

Help is needed. I left a message here with details. Thanks, --Irpen 21:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for timely intervention.--Riurik ^(discuss) 00:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome Alex Bakharev 00:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barefact's language[edit]

Dear Alex, please take a look at this: [10][11]. . Also notice his threatening tone which is against Wikipedia rule. For example look at the kurgan talk page: To Ali doostzadeh and his Iranian supermacist troopers!! or The deadline is coming, and you need to perform or apologyze!! or Yes, alidoostzadeh should be sorry for writing here. The best cure from racism is education, try to read and you may be cured!!. And here is yet another threat: This is what I am doing, following these steps and needing help to bring opponents to a non-militant resolution. Barefact[12]! It is my belief that barefact has broken some serious wikipedia rules by his threatening tone. He already has broken 3RR once, but this sort of behavior is definitely non-constructive for Wikipedia and I hope some realistic action is taken so that he understands the seriousness of the matter of threatening other users.--alidoostzadeh 01:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте![edit]

Thanks Alex for using admin-oversight on my userpage. Best, DVD+ R/W 04:09, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Brasova.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Brasova.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another request[edit]

Hey Alex, thanks for protecting Iranian peoples. The same anon is now active on Kurdish people, I think semi-protection will be necessary there too. :-( —Khoi khoi 16:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. —Khoi khoi 21:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Themes[edit]

Thank you for that very useful information. I have a particular interest in Russian history and literature, and will now be able to keep abreast of developments in these areas. Again my thanks. White Guard 00:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warrior Soul[edit]

Hi, Alex. This time the problem is out of wikipedia but related with the web site. Khoikhoi warned me that the person called warrior soul started a propaganda campaign in his web site [[13]], cause this is a kind of trol-feeding, i did not replied. This person claims that the link to his site was removed by me (which is incorrect) and accusing us as virtual thefts. I think he's a paranoid. Actually, you know, i'm not an army expert and involved in this edit conflict in order to remove the mess of main equipment list and reverted the lists prior to the edit war and made some arrangements for army and gendermarie. For the navy and the coast guard the information is directly taken from the official sites. Many other wikipedians later involved in editing later and the articles are progressing day by day. I want to know your opinion and proposals about this issue. E104421 13:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

This is the second time I've thanked you - and my original thanks remains near the top of my user page. My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your support. Results are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 21:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barbarossa (Ottoman admiral)[edit]

There were different proposals about the name of the article and Khoikhoi offered voting. However, the voting process ended so fast (6 days) preventing many users (including the ones who contributed the article more) to involve in the process. Just 8 users voted with 5 support and 3 oppose. Furthermore, the last two voters are Tekleni and Hectorian who push the same POV all the time. The session is closed immediately after their voting by SysOp User:Duja. Is this a fair process? Regards, E104421 11:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, total 7 votes, 5 support and 2 oppose. I learned from User:Duja that one of the voters, namely User:Serali created a single purpose account. Actually, if the team is considered, 3 against 2. Anyway, i'm closing the issue, maybe carrying it to Wikipedia talk:Requested moves is better to make the period larger. What do you think? E104421 14:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After discussing the issue with User:Duja, i decided to close it forever. I'll try to adopt the new name. Apologizing for your pains, E104421 14:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

geographical co-ordinates[edit]

Alex, hi could you please help me include the geographical coordinates of Samiopoula at the top, (same way they are included in other pages)?! They are: 37° 37’N, 26° 47’S Can you please explain how to do it next time?! Thank you! Efpalinos 12:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

suppressing display of inline images[edit]

Thanks for showing me how to display a link to an image instead of the image. This is what I actually wanted to do. --Jtir 15:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

gallery in Zinaida Serebryakova[edit]

Hi, I like your choices for the inline images in Zinaida Serebryakova, but would like to restore the gallery using additional images. I presume you removed the gallery because it was using images from Commons, which does not accept fair use images (something I only recently learned). Would there be any problem with my moving more images over to En or uploading new ones so that the gallery can be restored? Also, do you know of a way to transfer images directly without downloading them to another computer first? --Jtir 16:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't know fair use implied such severe restrictions, but I do know you have done a lot of work uploading gallery images. When Serebryakova's heirs donated her works did they retain copyrights? (IANAL so this may not be the right question.) If the museums have the copyrights they might be easier to contact. I discovered an art history professor whose major area of research is Russian and Soviet art and who has written on Serebryakova. She has an email address. --Jtir 20:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you take a look at User talk:Cboncenne re permission to use images in Zinaida Serebryakova? --Jtir 17:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Lev Yashin.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lev Yashin.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irpen's actions[edit]

User:Irpen erased the comments I added to your talk page concerning Image:Power plant Dnepr.jpg (which is fine with me), but now accuses me of insulting you (see User talk:Irpen). If my actions were incorrect and you were insulted or even made to feel uncomfortable, please let me know and I will apologize. But I want to hear that directly from you, not from another user. Balcer 13:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Macosco Large Deformations Stress.png[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Macosco Large Deformations Stress.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a free image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 22:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Also Image:Maloyaroslavets Nikolaev Chyornoostrov Convent.jpg

Halibutt[edit]

While I myself criticized Halibutt for his recent action, I find the tone of the note you left on his userpage way too strong. you could get blocked from editing Wikipedia for it. You might not get another warning before having a block imposed - what?? For creating two articles under wrong names? Sure, it was intentionall, but I find it hard to find that offending, or overall very disruptive. As you have always been one of the voices of reasons in the debates we all know too well, I'd hope this is not changing. PS. Considering the amount of slander and attacks directed at Halibutt, I am amazed he has not left this project. We should support him, and deal with those who break WP:CIV and other policies, instead of punishing him when he is dragged down to their level.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 03:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo, Piotrus. Your level reached such heights that I'm afraid it will not be reachable anytime soon by anyone. Just quick question - when did any of Lithuanian editors came up xenophobic and pejorative remarks like this [14] and when did Lithuanian Wiki ADMINS rushed to the scene to deffend it [15]? But of cause when your level is reached, it is very hard to see what is so offensive about making pejorative remarks regarding the way some nations construct their surnames. It's just a joke anyway. God, those -as, -is, -us are so funny, but multiplied by ten, it's ten times funnier - Tiskeviciusasasusisisisus. I must agree really, really funny. Probably you will agree that we need more top knoch unoffensive ethnic surname ending based jokes in Wiki.

Yes, and we must support those jokers by all means posible, I will agree on that one with you. It is very funny to anounce those jokes on national notice boards so everyone could enjoy it [16], [17]. It does not stir any national tentions at all, because then your level is reached, it's just a jolly good joke. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 07:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EED, I will not clutter Alex page with our personal axe grinding, but I'll just leave one link for reference: Wikipedia:WikiProject Lithuania/Conflict resolution. The amount of spite and bad faith spilled there by Halibutt haters is probably the greatest I have seen in my entire Wiki carerr - for which some new users can be certainly 'proud'.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 12:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I saw less civil discussions on Wiki, but the problem obviously exists. I do not want neither Renata nor Halibutt to be driven from Wiki, so something should be done and done fast Alex Bakharev 13:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have milded out the standard template per your concerns Alex Bakharev 03:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 12:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

არ ვიცი ქართული არა? ჰაჰა:) ძალიან მაგრად მაცინე შენი კომენტარით.:) [[18]] Sosomk 03:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for milding it out. A small sidenote to what Piotrus wrote: either I created all of my articles under wrong names, which indeed seems to be offending to our fellow Lithuanians, or only one article. Not two, if I'm right. But still, while my bad level joke might have been of some (minor possibly, given the popularity of the subject, but still) harm to the project's credibility, it was by no means aimed at the Lithuanians. After all all names in the world have their Lithuanian version with their suffixes and their grammar, and using one of those names should not be considered offensive to anyone. Certainly it wasn't meant as such and certainly it wasn't understood as such (proof being lack of complaint this time; our dear Lithuanians have accused me of so many things recently that I'm pretty sure they would use this occasion to finally find some back-up for their slander). //Halibu tt 05:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, please be so kind as to enlighten me how the heck am I supposed to "return to working relations" with people who constantly slander my good name yet show not enough guts to either apologize or withdraw their accusations? Sure, fine, I could stand it for half a year (as the talk pages of, for instance, Wawrzyniec Gucewicz show), but how much more?

I've wasted enough of my time on trying to settle the things politely at the talk pages - to no avail. All I get in response is slander. My patience has ended. I could apologize to Lithuanians for placing an article on apparent Pole under his Lithuanian name only if our fellow Lithuanians act likewise and apologize for placing articles on apparent Poles under Lithuanian names. Sorry, tit for tat is the only way it works here. Sad but true, the only way to be just is to apply the same rules to both sides. I waited half a year before loosing my nerves. Now I feel excused.

I've lost all hope and belief in wiki rules, as they do not prevent some people from offending me and not even getting a comment from anyone. Just imagine what would happen if I started acting the same way they do. Some guys are moving pages all around and, when pressed to provide any evidence, just resort to personal remarks and unsupported accusations. But when I, after half a year of discussing and repeating my plea for sources over and over again, do the very same thing, I'm instantly bashed. Of course if I went further their way and accused them of, say, paedophilia, anti-Polish sentiment and hatred towards anything Polish, I would instantly be blocked. Is that just? Should I apologize for that as well? //Halibu tt 08:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I tried once more here. I don't know what should I do if it fails, but perhaps the tit-for-tat is the way to go. //Halibu tt 08:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias[edit]

Hey Alex, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoi khoi 04:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User removes comments from a talk page[edit]

Hi! Could you help with this issue... User Clevelander constantly removes my comment from a talk page [19], [20] [saying I am trying to evade block (although there is no block to evade). The talk page history shows this is not the first time he removes comments of other users.--Nixer 16:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, your comment is in now, I am happy the situation is fixed without an administrative intervention. Let me know if the problem continues Alex Bakharev 00:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Burliuk Livshits.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Burliuk Livshits.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex, I had already changed the licence on commons to {{PD-Art}}, which I think is appropriate here. And I did the same for many more two-dimensional reproductions of works of art, formerly licensed under {{PD-Soviet}}. {{PD-USSR}} definitely is not the proper license for these works. Errabee 12:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw it. I am not sure the changes are correct as the PD-art is for the reproductions of images that became public domain because of age. Thus, digital reproductions of Wladimir Burliuk are PD-art (the image was PD and making digital copies does not create new copyright) but reproductions of his brother are not (since the original were not PD). Well, commons have many copyright specialists and if they agree with you I will be only happy Alex Bakharev 13:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Geophysics house at molodozhnoy.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Geophysics house at molodozhnoy.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

A sad day it is :(

I remember I painstakingly copied/pasted them out of a PDF file. I can't remember where I found the PDF file unfortunately. I will hunt around for it and let you know. - Francis Tyers · 11:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, it was on some kind of government site, but I can't find it now. - Francis Tyers · 11:32, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the one, but it was something like this. - Francis Tyers · 11:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them are from here. - Francis Tyers · 11:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i know, unfortunately after some searching I can't find the PDF that I originally found them in :( Regarding the images on commons, I've become rather despondent. I think I'll just wait until the PD-Soviet thing is resolved and they are undeleted. I made a point of scraping the ~3,000 or so that were left into a private archive, so at least they aren't lost. - Francis Tyers · 13:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not in here either. - Francis Tyers · 14:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could email AARI and ask them if they know? Attaching the photographs you are interested in. I'm almost 100% sure that I got the PDF from their site somewhere. - Francis Tyers · 14:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cossack[edit]

Can you please once again re-semiprotect the article?--Kuban Cossack 13:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done Alex Bakharev 13:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Genocide in Peloponnese[edit]

"Once more into the breach ..." This time I would have asked Khoikhoi, but he does not seem to be around just now. Could you please please semi-protect this "article" (well, I myself suspect it is the result of scanning a Turkish Nationalist pamphlet). It is up for AfD and both Greek and Turkish anonymous contributors keep vandalizing it, both in fact erasing the deletion notification. As if that is not hilarious enough, the author has "Tsar Petro" (Peter the Great) link to ... petroleum. Thanks in advance.--Pan Gerwazy 09:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless of course it is deemed unethical to semi-protect an article that is on AfD. Sorry for wasting your time, then. --Pan Gerwazy 09:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your action. I did not think it was late, in any case. I understand that people cannot be at their computer all the time. Luckily that seems to have been the case with some of these anons too. Ogromnoe spasibo.--Pan Gerwazy 14:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Stantsija_mirnyy.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Stantsija_mirnyy.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the image is an "Ice barrier near the station Mirny in 1975 (photo by V.V.Evseev)". [21] --Jtir 11:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin[edit]

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words.

I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we?

Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.

Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

"Vandal fighter needs tools" -- sums up my reasons for the candidacy with perfect brevity. :) Thanks for your trust. Luna Santin 20:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

subpage didn't get moved to Talk:Zinaida Serebriakova[edit]

~~Hi, the page move dropped this subpage: Talk:Zinaida Serebryakova/Sources. (It's a red link now in Talk:Zinaida Serebriakova.) --Jtir 22:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)~~ It seems to be there now, maybe I didn't do a full refresh. --Jtir 23:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My watchlist does not show Talk:Zinaida Serebriakova even after doing an unwatch, watch, and refresh. --Jtir 23:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P:RUS/NEW[edit]

I just created an article on Ivanov salad and its not on Portal:Russia/New article announcements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marktheprices (talk • contribs)

Put it here then Alex Bakharev 00:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Thanks, I've blocked 'em indef. ~~BTW, whenever you add {{sockpuppet}} to a page, always make sure to subst it.~~ Cheers, Khoi khoi 00:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NVM, I guess it was Irpen who added the tags. Khoi khoi 00:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please grow up[edit]

re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Crisp

why bother searching wikipedia subjects you know nothing about for articles to delete? please mind your own business & leave subject area to people who know something about it. kind of comment i should sign: 58.7.197.50 09:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC) (User:Bsnowball)[reply]

As a matter of fact, I removed the article from speedy deletion and put it on the AfD instead, there people who indeed know better than me could decide if the subject is notable or not. Do you think it would be better to speedy delete the article? Alex Bakharev 09:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
um, yes. my apologies for not checking this properly, and for the stupid tone of my above User:Bsnowball

tools[edit]

Hi, Alex. I need some tools (i heard that there are tools helping edits) to make my edits more easier, cause whenever i open another explorer window to compare the articles, i automatically sign out. Some time ago, i accidentally edited with my ip name rather than my user name. I realised this after checking my contributions summary. You know i'm using static ip (144.122.30.134). What do you suggest? Should i use another borrowser or a tool? Cheers E104421 19:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, thank you very much. I'm the only person using this ip/computer. I'm going to install firefox. I hope this to solve the logout problem. By the way, where is the "Remember me" check box? I never noticed this. Regards E104421 23:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanx. E104421 00:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bon Boni[edit]

IMO it is not bonaparte. It is some other troll who makes fool of us. Still, deserves blocking, but don't write that he is bonaparte. Rather "imperasonator of" `'mikkanarxi 02:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moscow history in the context of Kiev Rus[edit]

Alex, I have a question to you regarding a reversion you made at 23:38 on 1 Nov in "Moscow".

23:38, 1 November 2006 Alex Bakharev (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 166.113.0.122 (talk) to last version by SDC)
(cur) (last) 19:55, 1 November 2006 166.113.0.122 (Talk) (→Demographics)
(cur) (last) 19:55, 1 November 2006 166.113.0.122 (Talk) (→Demographics)
(cur) (last) 21:18, 31 October 2006 SDC (Talk | contribs) (clean up, Replaced: privately-owned → privately owned using AWB)
(cur) (last) 17:51, 31 October 2006 Ezhiki (Talk | contribs) m (rv to Anthony5429)
(cur) (last) 17:24, 31 October 2006 83.237.13.237 (Talk) (→General)
(cur) (last) 17:18, 31 October 2006 83.237.13.237 (Talk) (→General)
(cur) (last) 06:02, 31 October 2006 68.166.31.155 (Talk)

The question concerns edits that I made on 31 October 2006 68.166.31.155 and not those made afterwards by others. From other topics you follow and the stance you take there, it does not seem you would object respecting nations who were part of the early Rus state and who do not enjoy being generalized as Russians. I am sure we would agree that the idea of a single Russian people consisting of three brotherly nations of Belorussians, Russians and Ukrainians is undeniably controversial. I am sure that this debate can continue and that cutting and reverting can see its end in eternity, but I hope we can find a better solution.

The edition I tried to make substituting Russian for Rus' does not infringe on the rights of any people that were part of the early Rus period of our lands. You may notice that my substitutions of Russia for Rus' were only made to the early period section. That way, we leave room for people to decide for themselves if Rus and Russia are one and the same. In that sense, to stay true to the spirit of the Internet and the *public* encyclopeadia, is this not what our role is about?

I do not want to make the debate political; I hope you would support the idea of staying as objective as possible to all people involved in the history of the early Rus state in the context of Wiki, for the benefit of those who lived through the history and those who are reading about it now.

Respectfully, Andriy

p.s.: one typo in the syntax used for references is a very fair edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geolog7 (talk • contribs)

A you talking about this edit The only change I made is revert changing persons->pepole back, mainly because word pepole does not exist. Then I was taught English in a Soviet School that the word persons does not exist either and the plural of person is people but it seems not the case in modern English. I am neutral here and would not change persons to people or back. I am not sure I understand how it is connected to the Kievan Rus' Alex Bakharev 05:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Well, if you are talking about that edit then you better ask Ezhiki. I, personally, do not find the distinction Rus->Russia; Rusian->Russian to be very important and try to be not involved in the arguments unless in the obvious cases. Clearly the people of 14th-15th century did not see any distinctions in that terms. For me Rus' is the name for the common Eastern Slavic state that collapsed after the Mongol-Tartar invasion. The parts afterwords consolidated arounf Moscow became Russia while the parts that got into the Lithuanian-Polish influence became Ruthenia and then Ukraine and Belarus. As I understand there is very little cultural connections between the Kievan Rus and Ukraine, e.g. Kievan Rus are never mentioned in any folk songs, bylinas, etc. The national heroic epics are concentrated around the cossacks not Vladimirs and Svyatoslavs, etc. Thus, I think reasonable to talk about Rus before the Mongol conquest, and Russia+Ruthenia afterwards. Alex Bakharev 06:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Geolog7: Alex, I apologize, my comment was misplaced. Certainly, the word "pepole" does no exist. As for your opinion on the appropriateness of using Rus', especially where you say "I understand there is very little cultural connections between the Kievan Rus and Ukraine, e.g. Kievan Rus are never mentioned in any folk songs, bylinas, etc.", then by your logic there is too little in common between Russia and the Kiev Rus as well. In reality, though, just walk the streets of Kiev and will not help noticing how much in common there is between the Kiev Rus and Ukraine. It all happened right there. However, if you are trying to refute the connection between the Ukrainian state and the Kiev Rus, truely there is hardly any more connection than between the Roman Empire and Italy. And yet, I am sure you would agree, that has nothing to do with modern Italians taking pride in that state as their past.

User:Arya Rajya Maharashtra[edit]

Hi. I have extended the block on this user by a week. Dmcdevit confirmed today that another user who had been trolling various disputed article talk pages writing vulgar edit summaries is also Arya Rajya. Considering this, and the fact that Arya had been fighting with many users, I feel that a week is better. - Aksi_great (talk) 07:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your support for the future bel.wikipedia.org

Sun Language Theory[edit]

Hi, Alex. I have a problem related with User:Khosrow II. I already commented on his talk page but did not work. He's confusing different issues. First, Hilaire de Brenton is a historian focused on Sumerians. Second, Brenton's book is related with a guess on Sumerian language connection with Turkish. Thirdly, it was Hermann F. Kvergić who initiated the hypothesis (Sun Language Theory). I already explained these to him. He's continuously reverting the article to his version and removing the other sourced information, such as an article on Hermann Kvergić, Jens Peter Laut (originally from "Turkic Languages" 6 (2002) (120-133). I had to revert and insert the information back but he never understood. You can see my comments from his talk page User talk:Khosrow II also, it's obvious that he ignores other comments. The article is now reflects his inaccurate version. Kind regards E104421 17:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a source written in 1936 by the New York Times about the Sun Language theory. That is very reliable information for two reasons 1) written by the New York Times and 2) written in 1936, at the time of the theories proposal. Secondly, it was hypothesized that Sumerian was the mother language of all languages, and Turkish "historians" and "academics" of the time, who considered Sumerians Turkic, ran off with the research and said basically that if there is a theory that says Sumerian is the mother langauge of all langauges, and that if we theorize that they were Turkic, then Turkic langauges are the mother languages of all languages on Earth. Thats basically how things happened.Khosrow II 20:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, all these linguists and historians were not turkish. Furthermore, the new york times does not mention anything about linguistics studies. Anyway, i appreciated Alex's approach to solve the problem. Ok, maybe it's better to mention all, although in my version i had added Hilaire de Barenton to reference section. Thanx Alex. E104421 07:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Osip Mandelstam[edit]

Hello there. I received your message about vadalizing the above article. This was actually a very stupid technical mistake om my part, for which I apologize sincerely. I happened to spot vandalism by 64.12.116.10 on the Lacey Chabert article, and then decided to see if this was a recurrent vandal, and when I saw his edit at the Osip Mandelstam article, my intention was to revert his edit, but for some reason I didn't realize this had been already done, and I ended up reverting the anti-vandal revert. This was a big Oops, and while I do make technical mistakes once in a while, I would never intentionally vandalize an article, as you can confirm by looking at my contributions. Plus, I do spend time reverting vandalism, which is what I intended to to on this article (which is of somebody I never heard of :( ). Earlier today I had to revert about 15 vandal edits by the same user, and I guess I got carried away in doing that. Again, be assured that my intention was good, I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time... please accept my sincere apologies, and I will try not to make the same mistake ever again. --ChaChaFut 03:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing the tag and thank you for keeping articles free of vandalism. Cheers. --ChaChaFut

so what you are in fact saying is that...[edit]

its ok to keep a topic highly POV and ethnically cleanse it so that the counter view is totally suppressed but that i cannot express my opinion about a deranged artist in the discussion section? Wow talk about hard core big brother attitude!!! lutherian 07:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were quick to warn me but dont seem to be in a hurry to respond to my legitimate concerns! lutherian 07:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CIVIL comment on the article not on contributors and irrelevant topics. Avoid infalammation try to be civil. The more inflammatory topic the more reserved and civil the participants in discussion should be. Are you sure you never heard it before? BTW re-reading WP:TROLL might be of some help too. Alex Bakharev 08:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sir insinuating that I am a troll? That's a very serious accusation on the borderline of what would be defined as a personal attack, there is absolutely NOTHING in any of my posts that would suggest trolling so instead of trying to lecture me on my code of conduct, I would suggest you make amends on the notion of evenhandedness! lutherian 12:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, let me get this straight, are you suggesting that my question regarding the edit amounted to trolling? Are you for real??? Did you read my original reply to your threat? If so did you understand that I did not make a personal attack on anyone in the wiki forum in my original thread? Also, if you read the wiki personal attack policy, you will notice that nothing I said amounts to a personal attack! If you dont agree with this, then please enlighten me by pointing out which personal attack policy I violated. Do you also realize that suggesting that I am a troll amounts to a personal attack according to the PA policy? lutherian 16:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/History_of_Solidarity[edit]

The objections raised in the last nomination have been addressed (I hope). Since you have voted last time but may not be watching the relevant article's pages, I am spamming you with this notification that the article has been renominated and new discussion is ongoing at the above link.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 04:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rytheu.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Rytheu.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 03:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User name Vayaka[edit]

Hello Avex. Thanks for taking the trouble with my request. I cant send you email using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Emailuser/Alex_Bakharev, it says

You must be logged in and have a valid authenticated e-mail address in your preferences to send e-mail to other users.

Do I need to create a temporary account? --195.210.185.5 13:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Thank you very much. If you you need any help you can ask me. --Vayaka 13:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CRCulver[edit]

Hi, Alex. This user warned me not to cite encyclopedias and reverted my edits without any comment on talk/discussion page. Is there something wrong with citing world wide recognized encyclopedias. I think this is common in wikipedia. I still do not understand his action of removing/reverting the information and references for this reason. Could you please explain, what should i do when referring to other encyclopedias? Is it something wrong? I do not think so? If it is, i shall remove them, if not one should warn CRCulver about this. Regards E104421 14:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your information. I added the information with sources to the Huns article again, and commented on the talk page about this, but CRCulver reverted again. What should i do? Should i revert the page? I reverted before but i made no sense. This user always pushes the same version, this can be recognized from the edit summary/history section, he does not let anyone to contribute. I shall wait for your answer. E104421 19:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

transnistria[edit]

Hi Alex, May I ask you to throw a cold eye on the Transnistrian main page. I have two suggestions.

1 Only wording that is completely factual and NPOV be allowed. Currently it is littered with POV.

2 Agreed changes be made by a nuetral editor for the time being while the page is locked.

3- Edit warriors be blocked if we reopen the page.

Mark us street Nov 7 2006

Thank you for your support![edit]

Se la face ay pale, la cause est...

23:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

If I'm a bit pale in the face now,
it's because of the amazing support
during my recent request for adminship
and because of all those new shiny buttons.

And if in the future
my use of them should not always be perfect
please don't hesitate to shout at me
any time, sunset, noon or sunrise.

User:E104421[edit]

Hi Alex Bekharev,

since you seem to know User:E104421 a little bit, could you please explain to him that the Encyclopaedia Iranica and the Encyclopaedia of Islam are relaiblae and - most of all - the two most important and authoritative works on Islamic and Middle Eastern/Central Asian history?!

He is vandalizing the article Hephthalite, constantly deleting the EI and EIr sources, claiming that these two sources are nationalistic and dogmatic (which is pure nonsense, since more than 500 world-renowned scholars, mostly from the USA and Europe, have worked on each of the two). He is also openly insulting leading scholars, such as Prof. R. Frye (Harvard University), Prof. N. Sims-Williams (University of London), and A. Bivar (expert on oriental and Central Asian history), also claiming that these scholars are Persian nationalists.

Your help as an admin is needed. Just take a look at his most recent reverts: [22][23]

Thx.

Tājik 02:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alex. Please note that i'm not the person claiming that Encyclopaedia Iranica and Encyclopaedia of Islam are not reliable. It was the user Karcha claiming so. Furthermore, i never deleted anything from the article but replaced the introduction paragraph prior to my edit to the etymology section which is more suitable for that paragraph. I never used the terms "nationalistic and dogmatic" and also "Persian nationalists" but i'm accused of being "uneducated hypocrite", "who unable to read and to understand", and "ultra-nationalist" by users Tajik and Khosrow II. Although being attacked, i tried to compromise. Everything can be clearly seen here. He's mixing everthing. Regards E104421 12:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@ Alex Bekharev: I had already talked to User:Dbachmann as well as User:Sikandarji (who is an academic in Oxford), and both have assured that the Encyclopaedia Iranica and Encyclopaedia of Islam are HIGHLY reliable and renowned sources. The point is that the Britannica - though it is no doubt a very good source - is NOT specialized on Islamic or Iranian history. It is a general encyclopaedia that collects informations and servs as a general source for everything. The Encyclopaedia Iranica and Encyclopaedia of Islam are scholarly works totally specialized on Islamic and Iranian history. Unlike many articles in Britannica which are usually NOT written by scholars, all articles in EI and EIr are written by leading experts, from Richard Nelson Frye to Mary Boyce and Ehsan Yarshater personally. These two encyclopaedia's are - of course - not gospels, but they are - at this moment - the most detailed and most accurate sources available, and they are THE basis of oriental studies in America and Europe. Just take a look at what scholars say about Iranica: [24]. Only this should be enough to prove that - in this case - Iranica is CLEARLY superior to Britannica or Columbia (by the way: the Encyclopaedia Iranica is a grand project of the Columbia University!) and thus authoritative. If Britannica says "a", Columbia says "b" and Iranica says "c", then "c" is the most accurate and authoritative answer - "b" and "a" are secondary!

@ E104421: of course you have deleted authoritative sources and called the Iranica and Britannica "POV": [25]. Your this edit proves that you are not a specialist on this field; claiming that Britannica is "more reliable than Iranica" or that Britannica "is the opinion of mainstram scholars in contrast to Iranica" is pure POV and proves that you have actually no idea of oriental studies. Besides that - as one can see in the first link, as well as in your most recent edit: [26] - you have actively reverted the reference to Enoki's "On the nationality of the Hephthalites" (which is THE scholarly reference work on the Hephthalites since 1955) and and the reference to Richard Nelson Frye's "The Heritage of Central Asia". Just for your information: these two scholars belong to the "mainstream scholars", and as you can see, they do NOT support the claim of Columbia (Britannica does not even mention the ethnic origin of the Hephthalites!).

Tājik 22:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(unintending) Firstly, nothing was removed. Dublicate statements and references combined in a single sentence (i recommend to check the final revision, cause other users also contributed and i had to keep theirs because i have no time to check their accuracy, but also keep the "pov-check tag"). Furthermore, there is nothing wrong in the Britannica and Columbia as sources cause these are the world wide recognized ones. The information included in the content of the encyclopedias are of course summaries and does not reflect the current research status. However, as far as i know from the policies of Wikipedia, Wikipedia is not a place for original research.

Warning: The Tajik is making a propaganda against myself. He is commenting on talk pages of users to invite them to contribute against my contributions. He's accusing me as "ultra-nationalist and vandal". I'm presenting the examples here:

1. to Khoikhoi:[[27]]

2. to Hectorian:[[28]]

3. to Sikandarji:[[29]]

The Khosrow II did the same, too:[[30]]

Here is the exact start point the debate:[[31]], then [[32]], goes on...

Funny, they did not realise that Khoikhoi and Hectorian turned out to be my friends. Anyway, I want them to stop this propaganda and personal attacks, cause the users coming to visit the page are starting accusing me without reading my comments and contributions, but keeping the "ultra-nationalistic and vandal" claim in mind. I already commented on this to Sikandarji. Kind Regards E104421. 09:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already warned Tajik to be more civil. That is obviously applicable to everybody. These Hun related articles appears to be difficult - there are many opinions and speculations and not many universally accepted facts. The opinions are somehow related to the modern ethnic conflicts. Lets assume good faith to each other and try to separate universally accepted facts, notable mainstream opinions, notable marginal opinions and not-notable crap. Lets keep cool heads and we would find a reasonable solutions Alex Bakharev 13:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alex. I strongly agree. I read the Enoki Kazuo's 1959 article mentioned above. He first summaries the old theories of that time based on Chinese chronicles, and continues with that time's modern ones, namely 1. the hun hypothesis, 2. the mongol hypothesis, 3. the turk hypothesis, then 4. the altaic people hypothesis. He also comments on pp.30 that "in any way, the origin of Ephthalites, of which nothing definite has been recorded, should be studied from another angle than an uncertain interpretation of their name. For this purpose, it is necessary to for us to study the history and, if any, cultural characteristics of these people". For this reason, he proposes another claim that there may be an iranian tribe theory also. At the end he concludes as follows "Though my grounds are rather scarce, it is expected that the historical and linguistic materials concerning Ephthalites are to be incread in the future and most of the newly discovered materials seem the more to confirm my iranian-tribe theory". pp.63 "Kazuo Enoki, "On the nationality of Ephthalites 1959". I think the Columbia and Britannica covers updated material concerning this issue, since the online versions are dated 2006. One thing for sure is that nothing definite has been recorded about the origin of the Ephthalites, and more reasearh is needed to identify their origins. In my opinion, the problem related with our wikipedia article is related with lack of reading and patience. If these users, namely Tājik and Khosrow II would have read the articles, they would immediately realize their claim is not that much considerable. Kazuo Enoki in that article just proposed a new hypothesis dated 1959, that's it. Regards E104421 19:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I need help[edit]

Hey, what do you think I should do about this image? Image:Boryspil terminal B.jpg You're an administrator, so you probably know better than I do. Thanks! — Alex ^(T|C|E) 05:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you know if it is allowed to make photographs in Boryspil airport? If no, then we have a good case that the photograph cannot be replaced with a free image since the photography is forbidden there. If the photography is allowed, maybe we can ask a wikipedian from Kyiv to make a photograph for us. There are many Kijans on Wiki 05:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't know anybody that's willing to do that. I'd be glad if we got a higher resolution photo that's licensed under GFDL. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 06:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe ask on UA-Wiki? Livejournal? Maidan? I hate begging for pictures, but have some success a few times. Private amateurs photographers are almost always agree to release their pictures, organizations almost never. Alex Bakharev 08:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

uk:Обговорення користувача:Yakudza#Фотография аэропорта Бориспіль Alex Bakharev 08:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Я пока нашел несколько фотографий, может быть это не совсем то. На коммонс Image:IMG 04242.JPG, а также на flickr.com [33] и [34] Фотографии на flickr под лицензией Creative Commons ({{cc-by-2.0}}) и могут быть загружены на коммонс. Там много фото с этого сайта commons:Category:Flickr. Я не стал их загружать, т.к. не уверен, что они подойдут. --Yakudza 09:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you look on the Yakudza's photographs? I think they should be good Alex Bakharev 09:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the image that's currently uploaded will probably do fine, but it's similar to Image:Boryspil Terminal B inside.jpg, which is already used in the article. I guess we can work something out in case that image gets deleted, and include Image:IMG 04242.JPG (thanks Yakudza!). I'm not sure the other images on Flickr will do, but Flickr might have something else. I'll take care of including that image when the other one gets deleted. Thanks for all your help, both of you! — Alex ^(T|C|E) 04:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]